CONTENTS FSNL NO 33 JUNE-AUGUST 1988
- Research Extension Administrators Workshop ................ 2
- Survey Data Analysis for Economists ..................... 2
- University of London M.Sc. and Postgraduate Diploma
in Agricultural Development for External Students ....... 2
- African Dissertation Internship Awards ..................... 5
- Fellowships for Development of Research Projects .......... 7
- Training Manual ......................................... 7
- Agroforestry Question for Informal Survey Work ............8
- Mapping Systems and Research Linkages with On-station
Research and with Extension at Bako, Western Ethiopia,
Gemechu Gedeno .......................................... 10
- C IA T . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . 26
- IFPRI ................................................ . 27
- CORNELL UNIVERSITY ...................................... 28
- CORNELL UNIVERSITY ...................................... 29
RESEARCH EXTENSION ADMINISTRATORS WORKSHOP FOR EASTERN AFRICA
This workshop will take place in Nairobi, Kenya. The
tentative dates are November 14-18, 1988.
Contact: Dr. P. Anandajayasekeram, CIMMYT, P.O. Box 25171, Nairobi, Kenya.
SURVEY DATA ANALYSIS WORKSHOP FOR ECONOMISTS
The venue will be Nairobi, Kenya, October 1988. For more information please contact: Dr. P. Anandayjayasekeram, CIMMYT, P.O. Box 25171, Nairobi, Kenya.
UNIVERSITY OF LONDON M.Sc. AND POSTGRADUATE DIPLOMA IN AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT'FOR EXTERNAL STUDENTS
Wye College offers an innovative post-graduate programme in agricultural development overseas, designed for external students and based on distance learning.
The programme leads to two possible qualifications, either an M.Sc. or a postgraduate Diploma in Agricultural Development. Both are awarded by the University of London through its unique worldwide External System.
The focus of study is on the economics, planning and management of agricultural development. The programme started in 1988 with over eighty students in forty countries.
The programme enhances opportunity for advanced training in appropriate skills in the economics, planning and management of agricultural development, has a great deal of flexibility built into it, is considerably cheaper than the cost of full-time study overseas, and means that people in important and responsible posts can undertake further study without leaving gaps that are often difficult to fill (a major opportunity cost consideration).
The courses are aimed at the needs of managers, planners, economists and other professionals involved in:
- area development projects, typically focused on small
farms and the households associated with these farms
- central government ministries, performing planning and/or
policy analysis work
- programmes concerned with health, nutrition and women's
- agricultural processing and marketing organisations
- the management and planning of large scale agricultural
production units, whether public or private sector
- aid agencies and non-government organisations concerned
For the M.Sc., students have to complete successfully eight courses, four in Part I and four in Part II. Part I consists of four compulsory 'core' courses:
- agricultural economics for development
- project planning, monitoring and evaluation
- economic and social survey methods and data analysis
- policy analysis for the agricultural sector.
Part TI consists of four courses chosen (subject to
availability) from a number of options, including:
- applied econometrics in agricultural development food and food policy in agricultural development business management for agricultural enterprises
- economics of the development and operation of water
- agriculturaL marketing strategies
- the administration of agricultural development
- women in agricultural development
- social relations of rural communities (sociology of
- livestock development
- environmental impact analysis
It is possible to substitute for one of the Part II courses a project or piece of research based on the student's work experience, subject to approval by a tutor.
For the Diploma in Agricultural Development students have to complete successfully four basic courses, which are the same as for Part I of the M.Sc.:
- agricultural economics for development
- project planning, monitoring and evaluation
- economic and social survey methods and data analysis
- policy analysis for the agricultural sector.
Applications are invited from suitably qualified. people irrespective of nationality and residence. Examinations are conducted in most countries of the world, but where this is not the case candidates may sit the examination in London or at another centre.
The qualifications required for registration are the same as for Diploma and M.Sc. registration by internal students of the University of London. For the Diploma, either a degree or technical or professional qualification accepted by the University is required, or work experience judged appropriate and relevant by the University. For the M.Sc., a good degree in Agriculture, Economics or Agricultural Economics, or other appropriate discipline, accepted by the University is required. Diploma candidates who do exceptionally well in their examinations may be invited to consider changing their registration to the M.Sc., and proceeding to Part II of the M.Sc.
It is important to note that the programme requires a high level of English Language ability in reading and writing.
Total fees for the M.Sc are 2,950 and for the Diploma 1,650. In both cases, this includes an initial registration fee of 350, valid for a period of up to five years, and a fee for each individual course of 325 which covers study materials, tuition and examination. The fee structure is thus:
M.Sc. 350 plus 325 x 8 E 2,950
Diploma 350 plus 325 x 4 E 1,650
Fees may be paid in total at th'e time of initial registration. Alternatively, students may begin by paying the initial registration fee plus fees for the courses they take in
their first year, and then pay annually for the courses they take in each subsequent year.
Registration, including payment of fees, for each academic year commencing in February is closed on October 31st of the preceding year, e.g. registration for 1989 has to be completed by October 31st 1988.
For more information please contact: Dr. Henry, Bernstein, Director of the External Programme, Wye College, Universityj of London, Ashford, Kent TN25 5AH England, U.K., Telephone: 0233812401; Telex: 96118 ANZEEC G; Fax: 0233813320.
AFRICAN DISSERTATION INTERNSHIP AWARDS
The Rockefeller Foundation is pleased to announce a program to enable African graduate students enrolled in United States universities to undertake supervised dissertation research in Africa.
The primary aim of the program is to increase the quality and relevance of overseas advanced training for outstanding African scholars and, thereby, to facilitate their transition into a productive scientific career when they return to Africa. To this end, the Foundation will provide support for approximately 25 young African men and women who are enrolled in U.S. universities to return to Africa for a period of 12-18 months to carry out doctoral research either in their home countries or in another country where a local university or research institute can provide adequate supervision in the student's field.
The awards are open to citizens of sub-Saharan African countries studying in the United States who are about to embark on dissertation research in the fields of agricultural sciences, health and life sciences, related social sciences and history. Research projects must require field observation or use of primary sources only available in Africa.
Interns will be selected through a highly competitive process that includes both open applications and nominations by faculty advisors or by directors of potential host institutions in Africa. The applicant will be responsible for arranging placement at an institution in Africa able to provide appropriate research support, although in certain cases the Foundation may be in a position to assist with placements. The candidate's U.S. faculty advisor, the hosting institution in Africa, and the funding agency with primary responsibility for financing the student's graduate work must endorse the application. The
program will be implemented in collaboration with the African Academy of Sciences, based in Nairobi, Kenya.
The awards are intended to supplement each recipient's current educational support package and might include one or more of the following items: international travel and living expenses for up to 18 months in Africa, local transportation and research-related costs. Internship plans and budgets would thus be negotiated to fit individual circumstances, but should not exceed $24,000. In addition, awards will generally include an administrative contribution of $2,500 to the African institution and one field-site visit for the intern's U.S. faculty advisor. In certain cases the Foundation will also provide funding to enable the African host institution supervisor to attend the intern's dissertation defense in the U.S. Successful applicants will be asked to provide a letter from the appropriate
administrative office of the U.S. sponsoring university stating the institution's willingness to administer the award (with the exception of the contribution to the African host institution).
There is no formal deadline for applications, but it is strongly urged that they be submitted well in advance of the expected field work starting date. Preliminary inquiries
(enclosing a transcript) are encouraged to determine the appropriateness of the research project and the proposed
institutional setting in Africa. The full selection committee will only consider complete applications, which must include the following:
1. A written dissertation proposal submitted jointly by the candidate and his or her U.S. faculty advisor. The proposal should follow standard dissertation proposal requirements and include the research objectives, conceptual framework, methods and plan of work. It should also discuss the project's relevance to African development
2. A letter from the sponsor at the proposed host
institution in Africa, confirming that the institution can provide needed services such as laboratory facilities,
access to study sites, and technical advice.
3. A budget not to exceed $24,000, listing living, travel, research and writing costs not covered by the applicant's current educational support package. Information about
other sources of funding for doctoral research and writing
costs should be included.
4. A letter of endorsement from an appropriate official of the funding agency with primary responsibility for
financing the student's graduate work.
5. Post-graduate transcripts, a curriculum vitae, and an abstract of the candidate's master's thesis when
Send all proposals and enquiries to: African Dissertation Internships, The Rockefeller Foundation, 1133 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10036; or African Dissertation Internships, The Rockefeller Foundation, P.O. Box 47543,
FELLOWSHIPS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF RESEARCH PROJECTS 1988-1989
A variety of opportunities for African researchers, individually or in teams, and research teams of African and non-African researchers are available from the Project on African Agriculture: Crisis and Transformation, sponsored by the Joint Committee on African Studies of the American Council of Learned Societies and the Social Science Research Council. The Project aims to promote interdisciplinary analysis particularly involving natural and social scientists of the agricultural crisis in sub-Saharan Africa. Two cohorts of fellows will be selected in 1988, one in May (application deadline: February 1), and one in November (application deadline: August 1). One cohort of fellows will be selected in 1989. The competition will occur in March 1989 with a deadline of December 31, 1988. Awards for periods of 3-12 months will be granted to support innovative projects involving training and research activities. Interdisciplinary applications are particularly encouraged. Applicants may come from any of three categories: recent graduates (minimum of Master's Degree or equivalent); mid-career scholars at universities or research institutes; professionals in government posts. For additional information write to: Fellowship Program, Project on African Agriculture, Social Science Research Council, 605 Third Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10158 U.S.A., telephone (212) 661-0280.
Each year since 1983 The International Livestock Centre for Africa JILCA) has given a course on the economic effects of animal disease in Africa and the comparative value of various control measures. This training in applied epidemiology has now been delivered twice to francophone and three times to anglophone African veterinarians. All told, more than 100 professionals from 31 sub-Saharan countries have now received instruction in what Schwabe calls the "revolution in veterinary medicine".
Although ILCA believe that veterinary epidemiology practiced
in accordance with economic principles is the most practical means of animal disease control, it is a complex speciality that is still not widely used. Prominent among its practitioners, particularly in under-developed parts of the world, are the members of the Veterinary Epidemiology and Economic Research Unit of Reading University. It is this group that has been mainly responsible for teaching these ILCA courses.
ILCA has now published a training manual to improve the quality of future courses and, more importantly, assist African teachers in their efforts to extend knowledge on this subject. It was written by those most responsible for teaching this subject at ILCA. Its title is "Veterinary Epidemiology and
Economics in Africa".
The manual is available both in English and in French. If additional copies are wanted, Africans can obtain them from ILCA. For readers outside Africa, copies of the manual can be purchased from: WINROCK INTERNATIONAL, 1611 N. Kent Street, Suite 600,
Arlington, AV 22209, U.S.A.
AGROFORESTRY QUESTION FOR INFORMAL SURVEY WORK
The following additions to the CIMMYT Guidelines for informal survey were suggested by Dr. T. Bunderson, a USAID funded technical assistant to the Malawi Department of Agricultural Research. The additions are intended to serve as a comprehensive survey of problems and practices relating to
agroforestry. Rather they are supplementary to the other survey components, and will focus on key issues relating to existing and potential uses of trees among smallhold farmers. The questions qere designed for use in the Chitipa region of Malawi, but can be easily be modified for other circumstances.
The topics covered in the questions below are designed to discover the key constraints to agricultural activities, and how trees are currently used or could be used to ameliorate some of these contsraints.
General Agroforestry Practices and Problems
1. Determine the availability of wood for fuel and
building needs, and the sources of this wood.
2. Determine whether trees have been, deliberately left or
grown on farmland or around the household.
3. Try to specify the local names of these trees, and the
numbers of each, being careful to distinguish between trees on farmland and those at the household.
(Remember to include fruit trees).
4. Determine the specific uses or functions of each of the
named tree species.
5. Determine if the farmer knows of any trees that improve
or do not harm crops grown under or near to them.
Specify tree names and crops.
6. Establish whether the farmer is familiar with the tree
Msangu msangu (Acacia albida).
7. Determine what value this tree has, and whether it
occurs in that area.
8. Does the farmer grow or buy any tree seedlings himself,
and if so, what species and for what uses.
9. If the farmer had a choice, would he increase the
numbers of trees on his farm, and which trees species
he would select.
10. Establish whether there are any tree nurseries nearby,
and what species are available in these nurseries.
Steep Hillside Cultivation
1. Establish whether the farmer grows any crops on steep
land. Specify which crops, and why such areas are used
for these crops.
2. Try to establish the relative periods of continuous
cropping vs. fallow in such areas.
3. What a.-, the most important tree species in the fallow
and how long does it take them to grow to a reasonable
4. Determine the 3 most important factors affecting crop
production on steep land.
5. Determiine wnat practices are used or could be used to
alleviate these problems.
FARMING SYSTEMS RESEARCH LINKAGES WITH ON-STATION RESEARCH
AND WITH EXTENSION AT BAKO, WESTERN ETHIOPIA
Assistant Research Officer and FSR Agronomist
Institute of Agricultural Research
Bako Agricultural Research Centre P.O. Box 3, Bako, Ethiopia
In developing nations farming systems research and extension (FSR/E) is currently used to develop and adapt appropriate agricultural technologies for small farmers in order to increase their productivity. FSR/E methodologies have emerged as a result of the appropriateness of many agricultural research results to small farmers. The major reason for ineffectiveness of
conventional, station based agricultural research is its reliance on a top-down approach which neglects the socio-economic
conditions of small farmers.
Although a number of projects have been initiated in
Ethiopia to transfer research results, farmers are often found to be reluctant to accept most of the technologies on offer. However, the body of knowledge available from on-sation research is useful for FSR/E. Some of the findings can be used with only slight modifications.
In Ethiopia the Institute of Agricultural Research (IAR) has undergone a number of institutional changes in recent years including:
a) the development of a commodity team approach which
brings together professionals from several disciplines
to work on a particular commodity,
b) the institutionalization of FSR/E within the
c) the establishment of a research and extension
This paper describes the integration of OFR/E with on-station research and with extension, as they relate to Bako, Western Ethiopia. As an introduction I briefly describe
off-station activities prior to FSR/E and the evolution of FSR/E at Bako.
i) Off-Station Activities prior to FSR/E at Bako
Trials have been conducted on farmers' fields around Bako Research Center since 1970/71 (TAR 1971). The objective of these early trials was to evaluate different technologies from on-station improved conditions under farmer conditions and to demonstrate to farmers the value of the improved methods. The trials were replicated and and plot size were small (e.g. 15-32M2 for maize). Management of the trials was optimum and farmers participation in trials was minimal.
Farmers did not accept most of technologies demonstrated in these trials. In seeking a better approach the Department of Socio-Economics and Farm Management (now the Department of Agricultural Economics and Farming Systems Research) conducted the first multidisciplinary farming systems diagnostic survey in 1977/78 around Bako. The objective of the survey was to identify farmers' important technical problems as perceived by the farmers themselves (Mekuria, 1985).
Based on the problems identified and farmers' circumstances, packages of innovations were identified and tested under farmers' conditions. These tests evaluated the technologies under the farmers' conditions and assessed farmers feed back.
Non-replicated plots were used and plot sizes for maize and sorghum were one hectare. The farmers were responsible for all inputs except the seed. This program, which was called the Package Testing Program, played an important role in obtaining farmers' reactions to new technology. The key observation in this work was that farmers selected from the package of innovations and modified the most important components. (Table 1).
They were seen to change the fertilizer rate on maize from 75/75 to 18/46 kg/ha Of P205 Follow up discussion with farmers showed cash shortage and limited fertilizer supply were the reasons. The row spacing the farmers used for maize was 55 x 40 cm instead of 75 x 30 cm recommended, which is dictated by the plough width the farmers use. Fertilizer on sorghum was rejected while improved varieties of Narvocy crops were accepted except that seed supply limitations reduced adoption. The package approach was implemented at Bako for 8 years from 1978-1985. Even with the modifications described, farmers were able to obtain better output than under their own management.
:*Since the experiments had no control treatments it was not possible to compare the package with the farmers' practices. it
Table 1. Farmers' reaction to technologies based on package testing.
Techno 1 o g y
Crop State of
technology Variety Planting time Spacing Weeding Fertilizer
Maize Recommendation improved May 75 x 30cm 2(25-30455-60 75 kg N/ha
days after 75 kg P=O1/ha
Modification improved April & May 55 x 40cm hoeing 15-30d 18 kg N/ha
& local -broadcasting d.a.p.+ox cult. 46 kg PwOniha
+ pulling -no fertilizer
Reason for Seed suply, April for -local plough -weedy condit. cash shortage
modification brewing green cobs
quality, -labour -oxen more supply shortage
weevil shortage speedy
Sorghum Recommendation improved May 75 x 15cm as for maize 75 kg N/ha
75 kg PnOn/ha
Modification most local April broad cost as for maize no fertilizer
Why modification Seed supply clash with labour as for maize cash shortage
disease late maturity shortage priority for
was also difficult to conclude whether the farmers' modifications were appropriate or not.
Another important drawback of the package is the complexity of the technologies; farmers hardly understood the components of the package. The practical problems in implementing the package testing program laid the ground for the switch to a farming systems research approach during 1984/85.
ii) Evolution of Farming Systems at Bako
On-farm research using a farming systems and extension prospective commenced in Bako in 1984. Although FSR/E projects usually begin with surveys the researchers decided to begin with two on-farm experiments, since they felt confident about their understanding of the system based on the 1977/78 survey and the package testing experience. The work was initiated by the department coordinator, an M.Sc. economist based in Addis Ababa 260 km away. The department staff at Bako was one B.Sc. agricultural economist who was assisted by researchers from other disciplines on a part-time basis. In 1985 the department
recruited a full-time agronomist, a second agricultural economist and the number of on-farm experiments increased from two to six types.
There has been a lot of improvement in implementation as the work progressed. This is mainly due to the participation of the researchers in the CIMMYT regional and in-country training workshops. The major changes made in the programme between 1984 and 1987 are indicated in Table 2. Intensive system description and understanding was achieved through diagnostic informal and formal surveys in 1986. Thereafter survey data collection has focussed on specific agronomic and economic data. The survey findings have contributed to trial design especially by defining and explaining farmers' management practices. Increasing the number of replicates per site has resulted in more reliable data and better evaluation. Farmers have become much more involved in trial management and in assessments of the treatments and experimental results. Trials are now discussed with the farmers before implementation. The discussion includes objective of the trials, types of treatments and the responsibilities of the farmers. On-farm experiments are now conducted on the fields of the two target groups (producers' cooperatives and individual, i.e. private farmers identified in the 1986 survey.
Table 2. Key points in the evolution of on-farm research at
Bako, 1984 1987.
Information 1984 1985 1986 1987
Plot size (m2) 2000 200 & 100 20 & 200 20-40
Replicate/site 1 1 2 or 3 2 or 3
Total # of sies 4 27 21 18
Type of survey I + F SV SV
in trial ** *** t
# of experiments 2 6 5 8
I = Informal survey, F = Formal survey, SV = Specific survey,
* = Good, ** = Better, *** = Best
As a result of on-farm experimentation it was possible to modify research recommendations. Four examples follow:
1. To adress a soil fertility problem on maize a fertilizer
experiment was conducted on farmers' fields for two years at several locations. The treatments were based on previous results from on-station fertilizer experiments and the non-experimental variables were set at an average farmers' level. The results indicated that the economically acceptable rates were 41/46 or 100/50 kg/ha N/P205 depending on the cash availability as opposed to the 75/75 kg/ha N/P205 research station recommendation. The research station recommendation was
based on only an agronomic evaluation.
2. In an experiment on intercropping perennial forage crops
with maize to address a dry season feed problem three years of results showed that two forage crops, Chloris geyona (a grass) and Desmodium uncinatum (a legume) can be succesfully intercropped with maize if planted 55-60 days after planting maize, without affecting maize
yields. The forage yield in the year after the intercropping year was 7.41-1085 and 2.21-12.21 t/ha fro
Chloris and Desmodium.
3. For family food security sorghum varieties were tested
under recommended and farmers' management. The recommended management was included to satisfy the on-station researchers' belief that says improved varieties should be tested under recommended management.
Preliminary grain yield results indicated that two improved varieties (D1057 and IS9302) were superior to the local under farmers' management but only one of the two improved varieties (D1057) significantly outyielded
the farmers' variety under improved management.
4. A comparison of recommended hand weeding with the
farmers' weeding practice showed the farmers' practice had a slightly higher yield and required lower labour
inputs at the labour peak period.
iii) Integration of FSR/E with On-station Research
Another important achievement of the FSR/E program at Bako is the changing of station research thrusts. At present the on-station research programmme is planned based on the priority problems identified through the FSR/E surveys and from feed back from the on-farm experiments. The following are only few examples among many of where the FSR/E program has directed on-station research:
1. The breeding of early maturing maize was not considered
important since the Bako area has sufficient rainfall with good distribution over about five months. When it was found that farmers suffer from late season food shortage ard use early varieties which yield lower than the mid-late maturing varieties but solve the late
season food problem, breeding was started to increase
the yield potential of early maturing maize.
2. Lodging was identified as a problem with both local and
improved maize varieties. Breeding work was started to
introduce lodging resistance.
3. Study on fertilizer placement after observed differences
between the farmers' and the recommended fertilizer placement methods led to on-station fertilizer placement
4. Several on-station have addressed the shortage of dry
season feed and poor feed quality of oxen draft to prepare the land. The experiments include over sowing of natural pasture with legumes, feeding trials based on crop residues and animal health research which has
impact on draft power but was neglected before.
Thus it is easy to see that the Bako FSR/E and on-station research programmes are mutually supportive.
This close working relation is important for two reasons. First, to ensure the development and transfer of relevant technology for the small farmer. Second, to ensure the institutionalization of FSR/E program in the national research program in an effective and harmonious way with the on-sation research programme. The rest of this section covers integration during the various FSR/E phases, i.e. diagnosis, planning of experiments, implementing experiments and evaluating the experiments.
Diagnosis: During this phase disciplinary scientists participate depending on the relevance of their discipline to the likely problems of the farmers in the survey area. A good example is a full time involvement of the livestock specialist in the Bako area surveys. The report was co-authored by economists, agronomist and the livestock specialist. The survey findings are presented at annual research planning and evaluation meetings which involve station researchers. Further, the results are published in progress and annual reports in summary form and separately in detail. The survey results are used by the station based researchers for problem identification and treatment selection.
Planning experiments: In planning both OFE and on-centre experiments all the details of new research proposals are
scrutinized by both FSR/E and on-station researchers. The areas of scrutinity include the problem statement, background and justification, objectives and materials and methods.
The formal forums hosting these interactions among scientists are the annual centre preview, zonal preview, zonal research and extension liaison committee (RELC) meetings and the zonal review meeting (Figure 1). The participants at each level are indicated in the boxes in Fig.l. For example, at the zonal research and extension liaison committee (RELC) meeting extensionists, planners and participants from other user organizations screen the research programme for its relevance in light or broader regional problems and objectives. At each of the steps there is at least one member of the FSR/E team who
participates. This approach allows interaction of FSR/E with researchers, extension staff and others and ensures that the
proposals will be relevant to the problems faced by the farmers. In addition, technical scientists often consult FSR/E team members concerning the relevance of their own proposals before they present them in the above meetings. Also the FSR/E team calls concerned researchers for discusion of specific problems when felt necessary.
Figure 1. Procedures in planning and reviewing research programmes in the Institute of Agricultural Research
Center manager chairman
Researchers at the centre
and its subcentres participants
Zonal Research coordinator chairman
Centre Division coordinators participants
Zonal RELC meeting
Zonal extension Head chairman
Zonal Research coordinator participant Division coordinators participant
Other user organization participant
IAR manager chairman
Department coordinators participant
Zonal Division coordinators participant Zonal Centre managers participant
As a result of planning discussions a new proposal could be accepted, modified and accepted, suspended or rejected depending on its relevance, technical validity and cost of implementation.
The FSR/E team evaluates the relevancy of on-centre research proposals and viceversa. However, differences in research
concepts and procedures remain between FSR/E and on-station
researchers. Important areas of difference are:
1. On-station researchers have a narrow view of what type
of experiments and treatments should be included in on-farm experiments. They mostly question exploratory and determinative types of experiments testing varieties on farmers' fields before the varieties are released.
On-station researchers insist that only those treatments that are tested on-station should be included in OFE
even when they do not fit into the farming system.
2. The levels of non-experimental variables in OFE is
another issue. On-station researchers claim that unless the technology is proved to work under sub-optimal conditions on the station, it is risky to test the technology under sub-optimal conditions on the farmers'
fields. They are especially concerned about varieties.
3. On-station researchers do not understand the need to
relate the treatment selection to the current farming system nor appreciate the importance of including the farmers' practice for comparison in on-station research.
It is encouraging to note the situation is changing. For instance, varieties that are at release verification trials stage can now be simultaneosly tested on farmers' fields under the farmers' or sub-optimal conditions. With enough reasoning the farmers' treatment from on-centre experiments can be modified in OFE priority problems are the focal points for planning both on-centre and on-farm research relating the treatments to the current farming system. Including the farmers' practice for comparison in trials is now the concern of most of the researchers.
While cooperation between on-station and on-farm researchers at Bako is now high, as indicated in Figure 1, the region's Bako research programme is jointly planned by researchers from all the research Centres and Sub-centres in the region and at the regional forms we continue to face the same problems we had at Bako in the early stages.
Implementation of experiments: While the implementation of OFE is the sole responsibility of the FSR/E team the team
organizes field visits for on-station researchers to comment on and evaluate the management and performance of the experiments. This gives a chance for the researchers to appreciate the field level problems facing the FRS/E team. The researchers also
discuss problems and trial management with the farmers hosting the experiments.
The field visits are arranged at different plant growth stages depending on the availability of the researchers. Special visits are sometimes arranged to see discipline specific problems. Except that the on-station researchers are sometimes unavailable because of heavy work load the cooperation in this respect is positive.
Evaluation of experiments: The on-farm results are analysed, interpreted and reported by the FSR/E team. The information is made available to the on-station researchers through the summary reports presented at annual research meetings and through periodic publications (i.e. the progress report and annual reports). Likewise, the information from on-station research is communicated to the FSR/E team so that the team is made aware of the recent potential technologies which may be used to solve farmers' problems.
The integration of FSR/E with station research and with extension can be seen from the current technology development and release mechanism (Figure 2). The linkage between FSR/E and on-station research is stronger than that of FSR/E extension. The FSR/E farmer linkage is the strongest. The current technology development and release mechanism is complex when compared to the previous one. The current theoretical channel is on-station FSR/E research and extension service MOA extension, however, because FSR/E is a recent addition to the system some research results are passed directly from on-station research to MOA extension or to MOA extension through research and extension liaison service. Technology dissemination to the farmers is mainly MOA extension' s mandate.
The collaboration of FSR/E and on-station research in making recommendations is poor. The two groups still make recommendations separately. This can lead to arguments about the recommendations. The system we prefer is that the FSR/E team makes the recommendation in colaboration with the concerned discipline specialists and vice versa.
Figure 2. Integration of FSR/E with On-centre Research and Extension in Technology Development and Transfer
<- very strong
On-centre On-centre <---) strong
/ ..... weak
Extension Extension Farmer FSR/E
Farmer Research/Extension L
How can FSR/E and On-station Research Linkages be improved?
1. By training disciplinary on-station research in FSR/E
principles and procedures. Our experience indicates
on-station researchers accept FSR/E principles and procedures over time as a result of discussions at different meetings and through informal contacts.
However, formal training of the on-station researchers can help shorten the time to understand the principles and procedures of FSR/E. As a result of three years interaction at Bako centre we have established effective understanding of FSR/E principles and procedures among
2. Every researcher should be formally informed about the
job description of the FSR/E team. This will clear the confusions about the types of experiments the team
conduct (e.g. variety, NP rate).
3. Strong management can stimulate better linkages between
FSR/E and centre research. Credit should be given to
scientists for building stronger interactions.
4. Within the goals and objectives of the FSR/E and
commodity research programmes a high priority should be
given for cooperation between the two groups.
5. Institutionalize visits between commodity researchers
and FSR/E staff to see their perspective experiments.
These visits are sometimes limited to one per season or even ignored due to time constraints. The centre
management should consider visits important and
cooperate with the staff in pre-planning the visits.
6. Exchange of details of experimental results between the
groups can bridge the gap in information exchange which exists because of excessive delay in the publication of
iv) The Integration of FSR/E with Extension.
In Ethiopia the Institute of Agricultural Research is
autonomous i.e. it is not under the direct control of the MOA except that the MOA minister chairs the IAR board of directors. The board of directors has a technical committee whose members are two senior staff from each of the MOA, the Ministry of State Farm Development, Ministry of Coffee and Tea Development, etc., to ensure that the research addresses need of the clients. The linkage of the IAR with the MOA is strong at a senior level but weak at an executive level.
Both IAR and MOA have recently reorganized extension research linkages. The two major steps taken by the IAR are:
1. The institutionalization of FSR/E under the Department
of Agricultural Economics and FSR.
2. The addition of the Department of Research and Extension
The IAR through the Department of Agricultural Economics and FSR/E has attempted to strengthen the FSR/E and extension relationship by:
1. Organizing meetings with MOA higher officials to discuss
how the linkage between FSR/E and extension can be
2. Train the extension and research liaison staff in FSR/E
principles and procedures.
3. Making the field level extension staff cooparticipants
in the FSR/E programme.
The agreement in meetings with the MOA higher officials included that:
1. The higher extension officials would write formal
letters to lower level extension officers asking them to
cooperate with FSR/E in field activities.
2. The MOA and IAR officials would advocate the importance
of strong relationship between FSR/E and extension to
their respective staff.
In practice the advocation was well done but the formal
letter writing was overlooked. Above all, the how aspect of field level cooperation, in incorporating the FSR/E programme into the already overloaded extension activity was not thought over.
Thus, even though extension staff are trained in the principles and procedures of FSR/E, the participation at a field level is limited. At Bako, it is strong during diagnosis but weak during experimentation. The strong participation during diagnosis is due to low work pressure during that period in
contrast to during experimentation when extension agents have no free time.
The Department of Research and Extension Liaison has a division at Bako which has an agricultural economist working as an extension specialist and an agronomist. Both are considered to be conversant with research results and process the information in a manner usable to extension agents. This
division works in close collaboration with a committee composed of multidisciplinary researchers, including the FSR/E team leader.
The committee mandate is to:
1. Demonstrate research results to extension staff, policy
makers, farmers and other user organizations.
2. Carry out periodic training for extension agents and
extension officers. Here the extensionists also share their experiences as feed back from farmers with
3. Prepare extension materials, bulletins and pamphlets.
At the regional level the senior MOA officer is the chairman and several extension officers are the members.
From IAR the members of the committee at two centres, Bako and Jima, are also members at regional level. The FSR/E team leaders play roles in matters related to
FSR/E and extension integration as members of the
From the side of the Ministry of Agriculture the steps taken to facilitate better technology adoption for increased productivity by the small farmer are to:
1. Divide the country into zones (the Eastern, South
Eastern, Southern, Western, North Western, Northern
North Eastern and Central zones).
2. Mobilize staff from urban centres to rural areas.
3. Give more emphasis in terms of manpower and agricultural
inputs to surplus producing areas.
4. Adopt the train and visit (T & V) extension system in
the surplus producing areas.
5. Remove other non-technical limitations on crop
production. The T & V system has created a good forum for a better researcher extension linkage through the participation of researchers on the periodic extension
Despite the attempts made there is still a large scope for further improvement of the Research/Extension linkage in general, and FSR/E and extension in particular. The following section deals with some suggested means of strengthening the relationship between FSR/E and extension.
Means to strengthen the FSR/E and Extension Relations.
1. The Institute of Agricultural Research (TAR) and the MOA
should formalize the FSR/E and extension link so that field level staff are allocated enough time to collaborate. Staff with a BSc or higher degree should be members of a FSR/E team while lower level staff should be trained in laying out and monitoring OFE. In the T & V areas the FSR/E should complement the T & V
a) Identification and prioritization of farmer
b) Identification and pre-screening of technical
c) Design and evaluation of on-farm trials.
2. Suggestion 1 may be more meaningful if the FSR/E is
jointly coordinated by TAR and MOA.
3. Training extension staff at all levels in the principles
and procedures of FSR/E.
4. The FSR/E team should participate in the regular T & V
5. The FSR/E team should organize field days for extension
6. There must be some sort of incentive for the extension
staff to participate in the FSR/E programme. The
incentive could be short and/or long term training and
The Bako FSR/E programme's surveys and on-farm experiments have produced useful feed back for the on-station research programme and the on-station researchers are responding to the problems identified. From the on-farm experimentation there is a new recommendation available on fertilizer rate for maize and a tentative recommendation on intercropping forage crops with maize and sorghum varieties for producers' cooperatives. These recommendations were only possible due to on-station research
results. Without a strong on-station research programme effective on-farm experimentation is not possible.
The collaboration and understanding between FSR/E and on-station researchers at Bako is progressively improving. The positive IAR management response to some institutionalization problems has contributed a lot to the success of the programme. For further improvement, the suggestions made to improve the integration of FSR/E with the on-centre research and extension should be given due attention. In contrast the progress made in FSR/E and extension linkage is not that impressive. The most likely reason is that the IAR and MOA are somewhat independent organizations. The staff of the two organizations are physically separated and have their own programmes to follow. The
organizations should develop a common interest and reconsider the importance of a strong institutional linkage to work out the problems.
I am grateful to Dr. Steven Franzel, Farming Systems Research Advisor, for editing this paper and suggesting how'it could be improved. I also extend my gratitude to Ato Legesse Dadi, Asfaw Negassa and Tessema Tesso, team members of the Bako Farming Systems Research Programme for their help.
IAR, 1971., 1972 and 1973 Bako Research Station Progress Reports
for the Period April 1970 to March 1973, Addis Ababa,
Mekuria, M., 1985, Current Status of Farming Systems Research in
Ethiopia: An Overview Paper presented at the National Organization Workshop on Farming Systems Research, 23 26
Sept. 1985, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
CIAT, HEAD, DATA MANAGEMENT FOR RESEARCH.
Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) has a vacancy for the position of Head, Data Management for Research. Data Management provides support to CIAT Programs and Units in two main areas: Biometrics and Database Management. It is supported by an IBM 4361 group 5 computer, running under the VM/CMS operating system, with 50 terminals and personal computers attached to it. Database management software consists of IDMS/R and ISIS.
The Head of Data Management supervises the work of about 10 professionals and corresponding support staff. He or she develops plans and budgets, defines policies and standards on hardware and software, and coordinates data management activities which aim to:
- Advise scientists in the planning, design, analysis, and
interpretation of results of laboratory and field
experiments and socioeconomic surveys.
- Develop computerized databases organized at different
levels of aggregate to satisfy information needs of bench scientists, program leaders, and managers of the Centre
and collaborating national institutions.
- Organize an effective computing service through the
evaluation and implementation of hardware and software
relevant to CIAT needs.
- Plan and implement training programs on methods and
techniques of quantitative analysis of data for scientists from both CIAT and collaborating national
This is a senior position for a creative and forward-thinking professional, male or female, who has proven capacity to work with teams of research scientists. He or she must be able to extend the process of analysis to the conceptualization and development of databases. The successful applicant must have proven experience in the administration of information management systems, preferably in a bioeconomic research environment. He or she is expected to have a minimum of five years experience in developing and administering scientific databases. Experience with SAS and IDMS/R systems would be advantageous. Also required is an advanced degree in either computer sciences, systems engineering, statistics, mathematics,
Page 2 7
or other related area. Knowledge of biological sciences and experience with biological research methods is desirable, as is also an excellent command of English. A working knowledge of Spanish would be advantageous.
Applicants with the above qualifications are requested to send their curriculum vitae, date of availability, and names and addresses of three professional referees before 30 May, 1988 to Dr, Filemon Torres,, Deputy Director General, CIAT, Apartado Aereo 6713, Cali, Colombia.
IFPRI, NUTRITION POLICY ANALYST
The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Washington, D.C., is seeking a specialist in human nutrition in developing countries, to joiti its Consumption and Nutrition group (C and N) around Autumn 1988.
Desirable qualifications include: doctoral degree, or corresponding publications and experience; se-veral years of fieldwork; some familiarity with economics and social sciences; and proven skills in statistics, technical writing, policy analysis, and the development and management of research projects involving collaborators of many nationalities.
The salary is competitive, and for non-U.S. nationals tax-free in the U.S. Excellent support services are provided. The post is initially for 3-5 years, but may be renewable. TFPRI is primarily funded through the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research, but the appointee will he encouraged to contribute substantially to fundraising efforts, especially for new projects.
C and N, with the rest of IFPRI, has build up major data bases, in parallel for several countries, on a range of nutrition-related issues (e.g. the effects of crop
commercialization on nutrition; effects of food subsidies upon food production, consumption and child nutrition) New-work at C and N will analyze the nutritional impact of policy options in: consumer credit; access to land; technical progress in agriculture as a source of population change; and interactions between major agricultural projects and health.
Please forward CV and references, and requests for further information to: Dr. Michael Lipton, IEPRI, 1776 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 U.S.A.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY, SENIOR RESEARCH ASSOCIATE/ECONOMIST
The Nutrition Surveillance Program of Cornell University invites applications for a Senior Research Associate (SRA) who will serve as an economist for the research program on the
effects of macroeconomic policies on incomes, consumption, and nutrition. Under the general guidance of the Project Leader, the SRA will supervise several collaborating researchers and coordinate project activities in selected African countries. The duties of this position include:
- preparation of detailed proposals and plans of activities
for the total research program which will be performed in collaboration with local country researchers and
- direct participation in selected country specific studies
as well as cross country integrative research activities; focusing on linking macroeconomic policies with household-level indicators of living standards and food
- primary data analysis of national/regional
- development of macro, sector, or partial equilibrium
- supervision of staff, including Research Associates and
- interaction with the appropriate staff of AID and other
multilateral agencies needed to achieve program
- interaction with other staff and faculty at Cornell
- other duties as required to successfully undertake and
complete the program activities and related research.
This position will be based in Washington D.C. with frequent travel to Africa.
Applicants should have a Ph.D. in economics, agricultural economics or related field, with a minimum of four years related experience. Strong quantitative economic research, and economic modeling skills/techniques and abilities; extensive experience in quantitative analysis of poverty, food and agricultural issues of
developing countries, and experience working with
interdisciplinary teams is desirable. Knowledge of French is also desirable.
Send letter of application, curriculum vitae, and list-of~ references to: Per Pinstrup-Andersen, Director, CNSP, Cornell University, 2033 M St., N.W., Suite 333, Washington, D.C. 20036 U.S. A.
CORNELL UNIVERSITY, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE/ECONOMIST
The Research Associate (RA) will serve as an economist for the research program on the effects of macroeconomic policies on incomes, consumption and nutrition. Under the general guidance of a Senior Research Associate/Professor, the RA will work with collaborators in selected African countries, and assist with a variety of duties including:
- the development of economic models;
- primary data analysis of household budget/agricultural
- supervision of data collection and gathering activities,
as well as field surveys;
- interaction with the appropriate staff of AID and other
multilateral agencies as needed to achieve program
- interaction with other staff and faculty at Cornell
- other duties as required to successfully undertake and
complete the program activities and related research.
This position will be based in Washington, D.C. with a possible posting in Africa of up to 24 months.
The candidate should have a Ph.D. in economics, agricultural economics or related field. Strong quantitative economic research, and economic modeling skills/techniques and abilities; experience in quantitative analysis of poverty, food and agricultural issues of developing countries, and interest in working with interdisciplinary teams is desirable. Knowledge of French is also desirable.
Send letter of application, curriculum vitae, and list of references to: Per Pins trup-Andersen, Director, CNSP, Cornell University, 2033 M St., N.W., Suite 333, Washington, D.C. 20036 U.S.A.
Notes to contributors
The newsletter is published quarterly in January, April, June and September.
News, comments, letters, research results and opportunities concerning on-farm research in Southern and Eastern Africa will be considreed for inclusion in this newsletter.
Contributions should be sent to:
Malcolm J. Blackie, CIMMYT, P.O. BOx 30727, Lilongwe 3, MALAWI or Steve Waddington, CIMMYT, P.O. Box MP154, Mount
Pleasant, Harare, ZIMBABWE
@ CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center The CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center holds all rights to the source text and shall be considered the copyright holder for the text and images of these publications.
The CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center has made this publication available to the University of Florida, for purposes of digitization and Internet distribution. The CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center reserves all rights to this publication. All uses, excluding those made under "fair use"~ provisions of U.S. Code, Title 17, Section 107 are restricted. Contact the CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center for additional information and permissions.